alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32**

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

This Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the “Form 10-K/A”), of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in this Amendment No. 1 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Dated: March 3, 2005

|   |         |                                          |   |   |
|--------|--------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |    | /s/ William J. Doyle                          |   |
|   |         | William J. Doyle                         |   |
|   |         | *President and Chief Executive Officer*  |   |
|   |

Dated: March 3, 2005

|   |         |                                                                  |   |   |
|--------|--------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |    | /s/ Wayne R. Brownlee                                                 |   |
|   |         | Wayne R. Brownlee                                                |   |
|   |         | *Senior Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer*  |   |
|   |

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K/A pursuant to Item 601(6)(32) of Regulation S-K, section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K/A.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 113 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 prayer

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Today's guest Chaplain, Rev. John Fuller, 
senior pastor of Prairie Lakes Church in Cedar Falls, IA, will lead the 
Senate in prayer.
  The guest Chaplain offered the following prayer:
  Let us pray.
  God of all nations and all peoples, we come before You on this day 
acknowledging You as the sovereign Lord of this Nation and of the whole 
world.
  Father, it is a privilege to pray for these lawmakers, knowing that 
You hear and respond to the prayers of Your people. I pray for these 
women and men, whom You have put in this position, that they would be 
filled with Your wisdom to make wise choices and decisions as they lead 
this country. I pray that this body will be courageous, that they 
wouldn't be led by fear or their own personal desires but they would 
have the courage to lead with conviction that comes from You. Give 
these Senators strength to lead well through difficult times, that they 
would be strengthened in their inner being by a power that only comes 
from You.
  And, Father, I pray for a spirit of humility that recognizes that 
others are more important than we are and that You have plans that are 
greater than ours; that, Father, we would lead with humble and gracious 
hearts.
  We pray all this in Jesus's Name. Amen.

                          ____________________
```
Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature:

Project No.: 0317.02.005.510 Page 1 of 1

Project Name: DMR2013 CBI?

Yes

No

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

Incoming

Outgoing

Date: 02/18/15 Time: 8:29 am

pm

Company Name: US Ecology Texas Inc ERG Staff Name:

Kara Edquist

Contact Name: Celina Camarena Contact Phone Number: (361) 387 - 3518

General Subject: 2013 DMR Discharges for US Ecology Texas Inc., Robstown, TX

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

On February 18th, 2015 at 8:29am I called the general facility number and was directed to the voicemail box of 

Casey Murdock (unable to confirm spelling at this time) and left a message.

On February 18th, 2015 at 11:47am Celina Camarena responded to my call saying the information had been 

forwarded on to her. She also stated the women in charge of the DMR data had recently left the company so 

she was going to have to check on what’s available and get back to me.

On February 25th, 2015 at 4:11pm Ms. Camarena returned my call. She confirmed the reported data and stated 

she believes there are two reasons for the larger flow reading: an issue with the flow meter was detected after a 

large rainfall event (after the daily max of 4710 MGD was recorded), so the facility had the flow meter

recalibrated on 9/24/13. Another reason is the 004 outfall is larger than the other outfalls and experiences more 

flow on a normal basis anyway.

004 outfall (TX0104400): Possible faulty flow meter during large rainfall event produced higher value than in 

reality. Flow meter recalibrated and sequential months seem like a typical magnitude.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 114 (Monday, July 30, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5631]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              S E N A T E

Vol. 158

WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JULY 30, 2012

No. 114
```
<PAGE>

             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation of our report, dated October 8, 1999,
included in this Form 10-K in the previously filed Registration Statements
of IAT Resources Corporation on Form S-3 (No. 33-64595, 333-86167, 333-63897
and 333-62687) and Form S-8 (No. 333-71891 and 333-71885 and 333-68705).

/s/ SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP
--------------------------------------------
SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP

Los Angeles, California
October 13, 1999
# SMM 2010 - EGCSA Workshop SMM 2010 Hamburg, Germany 8th

### & 9th

### September 2010 Don Gregory, Director EGCSA SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## Workshop Schedule

• EGCSA overview • Couple Systems • Aalborg Industries • Q&A – 10 minutes • MES • Belco • Hamworthy • Q&A – 10 minutes • Wartsila • Clean Marine • Q&A followed by refreshments & EGCSA Handbook SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## IMO - Adoption of EGCS

MEPC 59 • Guidelines for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems adopted

– Wash water criteria to be reviewed in future

–Technology providers to collect samples, analyse & report to IMO 

### MEPC 60 • IMarEST submitted a pH amendment • Norway submitted questions of validity of EGCS as “equivalent” • Chair of MEPC postponed both papers SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## IMO - Adoption of EGCS

MEPC 61 • United States submit response to Norway addressing

– Equivalence

–Technical changes

– Adequate provision for enforcement

– Postpone review until sufficient in service data available 

### • France submit response to Norway & IMarEST

– Equivalence in terms of environmental impact to be confirmed by sample collection & analysis. Call on EGCSA to contribute

– Postpone review until sufficient data available SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## United States USCG & EPA

General Vessel Permit • USA EPA have approved a GVP

–The permit relates to water quality and discharges from vessels

– Upon pre-application allows discharge of EGCS wash water in US waters 

### Review of Guidelines for Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems • USCG consulted with EPA regarding Guidelines

– EPA invited to comment on wash water criteria

– EPA responded that criteria robust & that EPA content with the standard SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## European Regulators

EC Member States • Several indicating that they are content with current Guidelines • Use of EGCS in port has so far not raised any objections • Finland and Danish have approved an EGCS

SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

## Cost of compliance with low sulphur

Organisations in Baltic have raised concerns over cost of compliance and written to the EC • European Commission have rejected any changes to planned legislation • The arguments over cost did not consider EGCS as an option • Today there are a range of EGCS solutions that meet needs of both large and small vessels
SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop

# THANK-YOU

Visit our website www.egcsa.com SMM 2010 – EGCSA Workshop
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATE OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

Pursuant to Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18 UnitedStates Code

 

The undersigned, being the PrincipalExecutive Officer of Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”), herebycertifies that the Partnership’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended March 31, 2004, filed with the United States Securitiesand Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)), fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Partnership.

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledgingor otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

Date: May 4, 2004

 

 
| */s/*  | *Dan C. Tutcher*                           |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Dan C.  Tutcher                            |
|   | President  and Principal Executive Officer |

 

----
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5729-S5730]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED

  As in executive session the Presiding Officer laid before the Senate 
messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry 
nominations which were referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  (The messages received today are printed at the end of the Senate 
proceedings.)

[[Page S5730]]

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5208]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

  The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre) 
come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
  Mr. McINTYRE led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:

       I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of 
     America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation 
     under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

                          ____________________
```
##### 



Exhibit 12 POTASH CORPORATION OF SASKATCHEWAN INC.
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
(IN MILLIONS OF US DOLLARS, EXCEPT RATIO AMOUNTS)
(UNAUDITED) Year ended December 312004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002
    
    
    2001
    
    
    2000Canadian GAAPNet income (loss)
    
    $
    298.6
    
    
    $
    (126.3
    )
    
    $
    53.6
    
    
    $
    121.2
    
    
    $
    198.0Income taxes
    
    
    131.7
    
    
    
    (20.6
    )
    
    
    30.2
    
    
    
    68.2
    
    
    
    67.2Share of earnings of equity investees
    
    
    (30.9
    )
    
    
    (12.4
    )
    
    
    (5.3
    )
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Fixed charges
    
    
    134.7
    
    
    
    117.8
    
    
    
    102.7
    
    
    
    104.3
    
    
    
    104.6Distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    8.7
    
    
    
    4.0
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Interest capitalized
    
    
    (2.5
    )
    
    
    (1.5
    )
    
    
    (4.2
    )
    
    
    (0.5
    )
    
    
    Total Earnings Available for Fixed Charges
    
    $
    540.3
    
    
    $
    (39.0
    )
    
    $
    177.0
    
    
    $
    293.2
    
    
    $
    369.8Fixed ChargesInterest expensed and capitalized
    
    $
    112.8
    
    
    $
    105.7
    
    
    $
    92.0
    
    
    $
    83.9
    
    
    $
    66.6Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    4.5
    
    
    
    2.1
    
    
    
    1.9
    
    
    
    0.8
    
    
    
    1.2Estimated portion of rent expense representing interest
    
    
    17.4
    
    
    
    10.0
    
    
    
    8.8
    
    
    
    19.6
    
    
    
    36.8Total Fixed Charges
    
    $
    134.7
    
    
    $
    117.8
    
    
    $
    102.7
    
    
    $
    104.3
    
    
    $
    104.6Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
    
    
    4.01
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    1.72
    
    
    
    2.81
    
    
    
    3.54
   1
    
    Earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges by $156.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
April 2020

There were 9 surveillance inspections conducted at 8 different sites for a total of 50

fish sampled this month. Samples are targeted to moribund and fresh mortalities 

when possible. The water temperatures began to increase in response to the warmer

air temperatures. Seven of the 8 sites with fish in the water remained Category 1 and 

were scheduled for monthly sampling. One Category 2 (suspect) site was scheduled 

for biweekly sampling and completed routine harvest. One other site continues 

routine harvest. No cages were confirmed positive this month.

Date Number of 

Samples

Confirmed Positive Cages Cumulative 

Program Samples

May 2019 92 0 21169

June 2019 123 0 21292

July 2019 123 0 21415

August 2019 96 0 21511

September 2019 101 0 21612

October 2019 90 0 21702

November 2019 93 0 21795

December 2019 91 0 21886

January 2020 81 0 21967

February 2020 78 0 22045

March 2020 55 0 23000

April 2020 50 0 23050
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ANDRE BEADLE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-2536

[December 26, 2019]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin S. Fein, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 13-4753CF10A.

Jason T. Forman of the Law Offices of Jason T. Forman, P.A., Fort 

Lauderdale, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-30436

Summary Calendar

_____________________

LARRY LOFTON,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State

Penitentiary; RICHARD P. IEYOUB, Attorney

General, State of Louisiana,

Respondents-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(96-CV-3635-E)

_________________________________________________________________

December 15, 1997

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Louisiana prisoner Larry Lofton, # 99305, appeals the district

court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28

U.S.C. § 2254. Of course, we must examine the issue of subject

matter jurisdiction on our own motion if necessary. Giannakos v.

M/V BRAVO TRADER, 762 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir. 1985). Lofton’s

appeal is from the district court’s resolution of the merits of the
claims he raised in a second, or successive, habeas petition. But,

the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), Pub. L.

No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996), requires that a prisoner

seeking to file such a petition first obtain an order from this

court authorizing the district court to consider such a petition.

See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(3)(A). Because Lofton did not obtain such

permission from this court, the district court was without

jurisdiction to entertain the petition. See id. Accordingly, the

judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to the district court

with instructions to dismiss the petition.

 VACATED and REMANDED, WITH INSTRUCTIONS
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002****(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

In connectionwith the accompanying Annual Report of Ibis Technology Corporation (the *“Company”*) on Form  10-K for thefiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the *“Report”*),I, Martin J. Reid, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company

 

Dated: March 2, 2004

 

 
| /s/  ***Martin J. Reid***    |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Martin J.  Reid                        |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Angelo Barnes, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bonnie Wittner, J.), rendered July 25, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him to an indeterminate prison term of from 7 to 21 years, unanimously affirmed.

The deceased and his girlfriend, Angela Foster, were evicted from an apartment in which they had rented a back room. After the deceased broke into the apartment to retrieve his belongings, he had an argument with the defendant. The deceased and Foster then returned to . the apartment because they heard noises inside. Defendant was sitting on a bed in the front room with his hand underneath a blanket. Foster witnessed defendant produce a gun and shoot the deceased twice as the deceased began to open the door to the back room. According to defendant, the deceased broke into the apartment, threatened defendant, headed for the back room, and made a reaching motion which caused defendant to fear that the deceased was reaching for a weapon.

During the prosecutor’s cross-examination of Foster, the *696court sanctioned the prosecutor’s use of two court officers to demonstrate the relative positions of defendant and the deceased at the time of the shooting. However, despite repeated objections by defense counsel, which were sustained, the prosecutor attempted to stage a full blown re-enactment of the events, according to the witness. Any error which occurred, however, was not prejudicial. Since the jury was instructed that the two officers were being used for demonstrative purposes only, there was little danger that the jury would be misled regarding the actual circumstances of the crime. Further, since the demonstration was brief and not overly dramatic, it was not likely to inflame the jury *(compare, People v Budd,*38 NY2d 988).

Contrary to defendant’s argument, the court did not abuse its discretion by allowing a prosecution witness to testify that defendant warned her that someone in her family was going to die *(People v Davis,*43 NY2d 17, 27, *cert denied*435 US 998). Although defendant contends that only a tenuous link of inferences would lead to the conclusion that the defendant threatened the witness in order to prevent her from testifying, his argument concerns the weight of the testimony, not its admissibility. Furthermore, the court properly declined to strike the prosecutor’s inquiry and the witness’s affirmative response on redirect examination as to whether she still lived in the building when defendant made the statement.

We reject defendant’s argument that he was deprived of a fair trial as a result of the prosecutor’s misstatement of the facts of the case and the law of justification, and additional improper comments made by the prosecutor in cross-examining defendant and in his summation. The court sustained most of counsel’s objections, instructed the jury to follow only the court’s instructions on the law, and reminded the jury that their recollection of the facts controlled. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kassal and Smith, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) PW
PREFERRED YIELD FUND II LP
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         649,131
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,609,128
<ALLOWANCES>                                   125,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,333,259
<PP&E>                                      35,945,433
<DEPRECIATION>                              20,056,632<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,045,115
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          874,790
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,170,325
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,045,115
<SALES>                                      1,819,239
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,830,493
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,493,490
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,775
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                311,228
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             31,228
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   311,228
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.42<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F2>INCLUDES WRITEDOWNS
<F1>PER CLASS A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNTIL OUTSTANDING
</FN>
        

</TABLE>